One Heart to Make Christ King
Political Action, Separation, and the Path to Kingdom Influence
Renaissance Ministries | April 5, 2026 (Easter Sunday)
A Fellowship Discussion Essay – Meeting Summary:
“All these men of war that could keep rank came with a perfect heart to Hebron to make David king over all Israel: and all the rest also of Israel were of one heart to make David king.”
— 1 Chronicles 12:38
“By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.”
— John 13:35
“If ye will fear the Lord, and serve him, and obey his voice, and not rebel against the commandment of the Lord, then shall both ye and also the king that reigneth over you continue following the Lord your God.”
— 1 Samuel 12:14
Introduction: The Resurrection and the Question
On Easter Sunday, the fellowship gathered with a question that has haunted Christians since Constantine: What is the relationship between following Christ and engaging in political action?
The question is not academic. We live in a time when birthright citizenship is being debated at the Supreme Court, mass immigration is reshaping the electorate, Christian voices are increasingly marginalized, and the mechanisms of political influence seem captured by hostile forces.
Should Christians organize politically to resist these trends? Or should we “come out” of the political system entirely and trust God to work through our obedience?
This Easter discussion revealed that the tension is real — but also that the resolution may lie not in choosing one path over the other, but in understanding what “coming out” actually means and what “political action” must be grounded in.
Part I: Michael’s Theory of Everything
The Wheel of Perception and Action
The meeting began with Michael Sherman — Thomas’s friend of sixty years — presenting his life’s work: a comprehensive framework for understanding how individuals and civilizations interact with reality.
His model, rendered as interlocking circles reminiscent of yin and yang, maps the cycle of experience:
For Individuals:
- Look Inward — What inspires you, what you create, how you express it
- Convene — How you share with others
- Look Outward — What’s in the world, what roles are available, what you perceive
For Civilizations:
- Substance — The material and cultural foundation
- Artistic Vision — The soul of the civilization
- Form — How that vision is expressed (institutions, outreach, etc.)
The cycle repeats: input, output, perceive, receive. As Michael summarized it: “In, output, out, input.”
The Question That Revealed Everything
Charlie asked the essential question: “Michael, what will be the benefit to an individual or a group or family or nation for absorbing this invention of yours?”
Michael’s answer was illuminating:
“To perceive more about what’s in his or her life, and to perceive more about what he or she can do with it by extrapolating.”
And then, with characteristic joy:
“It’s a fantastic world. It’s amazing this human life thing. Wow. Whoever invented it? Just kidding. What a great thing… I’m just utterly amazed to be alive. Just breathing is a thrill.”
Leonard observed: “We are living in a miracle. Truly. It is something that is one in a billion, maybe more, that could come to pass.”
The Overlap with CPP
Thomas noted that Michael’s framework maps remarkably well to Conscious Point Physics:
“God started it all, and he looks out from himself back at himself. So it’s very reminiscent… You’ve kind of applied different words to it. But it is very familiar in the sense that it’s mapping perceptions of different perspectives, different actions that you take from your perspective.”
The individual and the all interpenetrate. What’s inside you is shaped by outside influences; what’s outside is shaped by what you put into it. This is the yin-yang principle — and it is also the CPP principle of consciousness as the substrate of reality.
Part II: Michael’s Challenge — What Mechanism Resolves Differences?
The Five-Word Question
After extensive discussion about citizenship and political engagement, Michael posed the question that cut to the heart:
“What mechanism best resolves differences?”
He illustrated with the religious wars of Europe:
“Both the Protestants and Catholics during the hundreds of years of European wars during the 1400s to 1700s — they both believe in Christ. Protestants do, Catholics do. They go to the source, they go to the Bible. They both know they are right because the Lord supports them. And they go killing villages from the other side.”
The question is not rhetorical. It is urgent: If two groups both claim Christ, both claim Scripture, and both are ready to kill — what could you say to both of them before the battle begins?
Susan’s Answer: John 13:35
Susan offered the answer she has championed consistently:
“If we bring forward the understanding that Jesus said that people would know His disciples when they have love one to another… You say, ‘Wait a minute. You both believe in the Bible. You both believe in Jesus. Let’s sit down and talk about this particular verse.’ That should give food for thought for anybody who’s not feeling love for one another.”
The test is not doctrine but love. The test is not correctness but character. If you claim Christ but lack love for your fellow believer, something is wrong — not with your theology but with your heart.
Michael responded: “I wrote that down, and I love it. I’ve quoted it to others since you told me. Thank you, Susan. One of my two favorite Bible quotes.”
Part III: Leonard’s Challenge — Definitions and Jurisdiction
What Is Citizenship?
Leonard raised the foundational questions:
“We need to define certain words that are foundational to this subject, such as citizen, person, and jurisdiction… We also need to understand who and what the US Constitution acts upon, and what exactly does it constitute. Can an individual be a ‘citizen of a State of the Union’ but not a citizen of the US?”
He traced the etymology: “City-son” — a son of a city. Born into a group that claims authority over you.
And the deeper question: “Who owns you?”
Leonard’s answer: “It all depends on who I allow to control me.”
This is the foundation of American liberty — voluntary allegiance. But as Leonard noted, this is also how liberty is undermined:
“Liberty is fragile, because what’s required for liberty is eternal vigilance and knowledge of what’s going on. And a lot of people just put that shade over their eyes and just go along with what’s going on, and it leads them down this path of servitude.”
The Real Question
The birthright citizenship debate, Leonard argued, is just one of many prongs:
“This concept of birthright is being used across the globe, especially in Europe, to gain control and overthrow countries using mass illegal immigration… The left in this country has been using this tactic to gain and maintain political control for decades.”
But the mechanism is the same: use ambiguity in definitions to extend control over those who don’t understand what they’re agreeing to.
Thomas framed the fundamental issue:
“It really comes down to: is there really a right to have nations? Do we have a right to define a boundary and to exclude others and say, ‘This is the state that we want to live in’? That’s really the question.”
Part IV: Susan’s Thesis — Separation vs. Political Action
The Biblical Case for Coming Out
Susan presented a thesis that challenged the rest of the group:
“What I’m seeing in Scripture is a path that God has provided that we could actually step outside of the rule of these Gentile nations and be a separate people, but still be amongst them to be able to teach and share the gospel.”
She distinguished between two approaches:
The Political Approach: Organize, vote, lobby, demonstrate — work within the system to elect righteous leaders and pass righteous laws.
The Separation Approach: Come out of the Babylonian system; recognize Christ as our only King; trust God to work through our obedience rather than our political maneuvering.
Susan’s concern with the political approach:
“What you’re left with is people choosing the lesser of two evils all the time. You get somebody into office… and now they’re in a position where they have to vote for bills that have a whole bunch of other things attached to it… This is not how God works.”
The Biblical Promise
Susan read from 1 Samuel 12:14:
“If ye will fear the Lord, and serve him, and obey his voice, and not rebel against the commandment of the Lord, then shall both ye and also the king that reigneth over you continue following the Lord your God.”
And verse 24-25:
“Only fear the Lord, and serve him in truth with all your heart… But if ye shall still do wickedly, ye shall be consumed, both ye and your king.”
The answer, Susan argued, is not political strategy but obedience to God. Get the heart right, and God will handle the politics.
The Signs and Wonders
Susan pointed to the Book of Acts:
“We see in the Book of Acts this lifestyle that the Christians had, where they’re doing these healings, they have these signs… Why isn’t this happening now with us? I think one of the big reasons is because we’re not obeying Christ. If we would obey Christ, I think we would see his hand in our lives.”
The path forward is not better political organization but deeper obedience, which would produce the supernatural confirmation that would draw people to faith.
Part V: The Synthesis — Both/And, Not Either/Or
Thomas’s Response
Thomas pushed back, but carefully:
“The issue is not one of whether we should go to North Idaho and separate or just believe and we’re great. The issue is: what does it mean to separate?”
He proposed that separation is internal, not geographical:
“We come out of agreeing with evil. We don’t go along with it. We don’t participate. We say no, I will not do this. And I am willing to put myself as a human shield, as a flaming torch, saying No, I will not do this.”
This is not withdrawal from the world. It is witness within the world — witness that may require organizing, demonstrating, suffering, dying.
The Gideon Model
Thomas returned to Gideon:
“Gideon did not do it with one man. He had 300. And we need a group.”
The 300 were a chosen cadre — small, selected, committed. They engaged in what was essentially information warfare: lights, noise, the appearance of overwhelming force. The Midianites panicked and destroyed themselves.
This was political action — but political action rooted in obedience to God’s specific command.
The 150-Cell Concept
Thomas proposed a structure:
“Malcolm Gladwell said 150 is the size of the group you can know everybody in, and you can have a level of collegiality. It feels like a family. Get more than that, and it becomes impersonal.”
The vision: Thousands of 150-person cells throughout the nation, each mobilized around Kingdom principles. The cells coordinate. They share information. They take action when called.
“If we have people that are on fire for the Lord, and they listen and they pray, and they read something and go, ‘This is my issue’ — and they put it out in their group, and other people say, ‘Hey, I’m with that too’ — you have a place to put your passion.”
The Missing Foundation
But Thomas emphasized — and this was the synthesis:
“All of this is completely for nothing if the heart transformation isn’t there. When you have people that are on fire for the Lord, and they listen and they pray… that is the foundation. I didn’t even say it because it was so obvious to me. But that is the heart of it.”
Political action without heart transformation is useless — or worse, it’s the Crusades. Heart transformation without any expression is incomplete — faith without works is dead.
The synthesis: Transform hearts first. Then the transformed hearts will know what action to take. And they will take it together, with one heart, to make Christ King.
Part VI: Leonard’s Historical Perspective
The Parable of the Vineyard
Leonard read Luke 20:9-18 — the parable of the vineyard owner who sends servants to collect the fruit, and they are beaten and killed, until finally he sends his son, who is also killed.
“This is how the Lord does things. He sends servants — prophets — to his people, and usually they’re rejected… The Jews at the time of Christ thought so much of these prophets, but they didn’t realize that their ancestors rejected them and killed them.”
The pattern repeats. Those who carry God’s message are rejected. But eventually, the stone the builders rejected becomes the cornerstone — and grinds to powder those who resist.
The Question of Method
Leonard asked: “What is different that we could do?”
He noted that movements have been tried before — the Tea Party, for instance — with temporary success but ultimate absorption or defeat.
“To do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result — what is that? Insanity. We need to be sane about this. We need to take a different approach to persuade people to think critically about what they’re doing.”
The Covenant Christian Model
Leonard shared his own experience:
“This thing that I’m involved with, this Covenant Christian thing — that’s what we are. We’re just all these little groups, and then we have these conferences we call ‘come together.’ It’s pretty good. We get a lot of people, and we’re all striving to have one heart — that’s actually part of the covenant we’ve taken — to be one heart in Christ’s heart.”
This is already happening. The Lord is building something. The question is whether we will join it.
Part VII: The Resolution — One Heart
Susan’s Final Word
Susan brought it home with 1 Chronicles 12:38:
“All these men of war that could keep rank came with a perfect heart to Hebron to make David king over all Israel: and all the rest also of Israel were of one heart to make David king.”
“I believe that this describes what we need to do. Instead of focusing on ‘let’s organize so everyone’s doing the right thing,’ if we will come together with one heart, making Christ our King — Christ is wonderful at organizing and guiding people.”
The danger of organizing beyond Christ:
“One of the dangers in doing the kind of organization beyond just helping people believe in Christ is that they would be better guided by Christ directly.”
The solution:
“If they put Christ as their King, and if they have conversations with love — not with anger or contention — then people persuade each other.”
Thomas’s Agreement
Thomas agreed — and clarified:
“That is the heart of what I am advocating. Putting it out there. Who’s with me? Am I alone? Am I a lone voice crying in the wilderness, or is this like the legions of angels shouting Hosanna?”
The vision is not organization instead of Christ. It is organization under Christ:
“No king but King Jesus. That’s the ground of it. All of this is completely for nothing if that isn’t the case.”
Charlie’s Gideon Insight
Charlie offered a practical perspective:
“When Gideon comes on stage, he’s sneaking behind the well, threshing his wheat to feed his many wives and children… You have an Israelite here who’s just doing his best to get by and protect what’s his. That’s when an angel appears to him and calls him the mighty man of valor.”
The lesson:
“I think the answer is that we each have to be doing our own thing, living our lives and enforcing our rights the best we can, always appealing to God. ‘Tell me what else is there that I can do.’ And I think God will show us. If we do our best to enforce what is right in our own lives, and always appealing to God — just open my eyes to what I can do — I think he’ll open opportunities.”
Part VIII: Practical Application
What We Learned
- Heart transformation is foundational — Without transformed hearts, political action is Crusade-level disaster. With transformed hearts, political action flows naturally from obedience.
- Separation is internal — We don’t withdraw from society. We come out of agreeing with evil while remaining among people to share the gospel.
- The 150-cell model — Small groups where everyone knows everyone, coordinated across the nation, each finding their own calling but supporting each other.
- The John 13:35 test — Before any action, ask: Is this done in love? Will this demonstrate to the world that we are Christ’s disciples?
- One heart to make Christ King — The goal is not our political agenda but Christ’s Kingship. When we have one heart for that, He will guide the action.
- Be faithful where you are — Like Gideon, do your best in your current circumstances while appealing to God for opportunities. He will open doors.
What We Still Need
- Susan’s essay — She has written an essay on separation that the fellowship has not yet fully engaged with. The conversation revealed that this needs to happen.
- The mechanism — How do the cells form? How do they coordinate? How is information shared? This is the Voting Network’s vision, but it needs to be implemented.
- The first demonstration — At some point, talk must become action. The first mobilization, the first public witness, the first costly stand.
- Transformed hearts at scale — Everything depends on this. Without it, nothing else matters.
Part IX: Discussion Questions for the Fellowship
On Political Action
- Do you agree that heart transformation must precede political action? Or can political action itself be a form of witness that produces heart transformation?
- What is the difference between political action grounded in Christ and political action that merely uses Christian language?
- How do you evaluate the Tea Party movement? What worked? What failed? What would be different about a Christ-centered movement?
On Separation
- What does “coming out of Babylon” mean to you? Is it geographical? Institutional? Internal?
- Susan argues that the political process inevitably involves choosing the lesser of two evils. Do you agree? Is there another way?
- How do you balance “being in the world but not of it” with active engagement in political and cultural battles?
On Unity
- Michael’s question: What mechanism best resolves differences between sincere Christians who disagree? How do you prevent another Protestant-Catholic war?
- How do you maintain “one heart” when there are genuine disagreements about strategy, priorities, or even doctrine?
- What would it look like for our fellowship to have “one heart to make Christ King”?
On Action
- Charlie suggested the Gideon model: be faithful where you are, always appealing to God for guidance, and He will open opportunities. Is this sufficient? Or does it need more structure?
- Thomas proposed 150-person cells as the organizing unit. Does this scale? How would you implement it?
- What is the first step you could take this week to move from discussion to action?
Key Principles Worth Preserving
On heart transformation:
“All of this is completely for nothing if the heart transformation isn’t there… That is the foundation.” — Thomas
On separation:
“We come out of agreeing with evil. We don’t go along with it. We don’t participate. We say no, I will not do this.” — Thomas
On the John 13:35 test:
“People would know His disciples when they have love one to another… That should give food for thought for anybody who’s not feeling love for one another.” — Susan
On one heart:
“If we will come together with one heart, making Christ our King — Christ is wonderful at organizing and guiding people.” — Susan
On being faithful where you are:
“I think the answer is that we each have to be doing our own thing, living our lives and enforcing our rights the best we can, always appealing to God.” — Charlie
On the 150-cell model:
“150 is the size of the group you can know everybody in, and you can have a level of collegiality. It feels like a family.” — Thomas (citing Gladwell)
On the real question:
“It really comes down to: What is God’s law, and how are you regulating yourself?” — Leonard
On being called:
“None of us are worthy of doing the work for God’s kingdom intentionally. But when you’re called, you’ve got to do the work.” — Armond
The Easter Closing Prayer
Lord God, You are the King of kings and Lord of lords. Every earthly authority exists under Your sovereignty and will answer to Your judgment.
We thank You for the gift of citizenship in our earthly nation and in Your eternal kingdom. Help us hold both with integrity, honoring earthly authority where it reflects Your justice and resisting it where it violates Your law.
Give us wisdom to understand the issues of our day. Give us courage to speak truth even when it costs us. Give us humility to know we may be wrong, and openness to correction.
We pray for our nation that its laws would conform to Your righteousness, that its leaders would fear You, that its citizens would be vigilant.
We pray for the Supreme Court as it considers the question of citizenship. Give the justices wisdom to interpret the Constitution according to its original intent, and courage to correct the errors of the past.
And we pray for ourselves that we would be faithful citizens of both realms, engaged in the conversation, contributing our arguments, bearing the cost, and trusting in Your ultimate victory.
Your kingdom come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.
In Jesus’ name, Amen.
“He is risen!”
“He is risen indeed.”
Addendum: Armond’s Update — Faith with Works in Action
After the main meeting, Armond shared an update on his business developments that illustrates the “faith with works” principle in action.
Armond’s reflection:
“This is going to be good for the kingdom, because this is going to provide seekers — people that need God to prove his hand — this is for them.”
This is the model: transform hearts, then take action. The transformed heart knows what to build. The tools (including AI) serve the vision. The vision serves the Kingdom.
“When you’re called, you’ve got to do the work.”
“When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.”
— Proverbs 29:2
“I teach my people correct principles, and they govern themselves.”
— Joseph Smith (quoted by Leonard)
Participants: Thomas Abshier, Susan Gutierrez, Charlie Gutierrez, Leonard Hofheins, Armond Boulware, Michael Sherman (guest)
Source Material: Renaissance Ministries fellowship meeting, April 20, 2026 (Easter Sunday); Scripture; previous fellowship discussions.
Related Christos Content: “The Duty to Judge the Law” (birthright citizenship); “Justice Between Unequals” (Thucydides and power); “The Scourge of Ungodly Character” (COVID and national character); Voting Network concept.